Is there a negative consequence of recycling guest posts?
-
I have an SEO campaign, where I have about ~100 target websites. I have an article on a specific topic, that is relevant to their industry and mine. The article links back to my website, and in exchange for posting the article the owner of the target website receives compensation in free services from our company. The topic is very specific to the marketing campaign and the compensation model. It is not possible for this particular campaign to create other topics for articles.
If several websites host the exact same article that links to my website:
- Is there a negative SEO consequence for the target websites?
- Is there a negative SEO consequence for my website?
- If yes to either of these questions, just how different would the post need to be to avoid the answer being yes to either of these questions?
-
I would not call it nefarious. I would simply call it duplicate content that Google will not be pleased with. Google can see lazy efforts to get links - and you are giving a reward to people who accommodate you. It's duplicate content. Google will likely ignore most of it. If you do this at scale don't be surprised if none of these links are counted.
-
Hi Keri,
I think I haven't explained this very well.
The target websites are small local businesses that do not have many pages. They are certainly not what i would call "Quality Sites", but this term is arbitrary anyway. This campaign is specifically designed for local SEO to get links and citations for other local businesses in a related industry. The campaign offers a free service from my business to the target websites customers. The post explains what the service is, and links to a special form on our website so that they can register for this service. I think you are interpreting this as being far more nefarious than it really is.
-
I see multiple potential problems here.
- This could be seen as a paid link.
- Search engines are not fond of duplicate content, so are likely to show a result from just one of the sites.
- The effort to make the content original enough for these different sites may be more trouble than it is worth. Quality sites likely will not be interested in posting content that is spun just enough for it to pass a Copyscape test.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Inbound links to internal search with pharma spam anchor text. Negative seo attack
Suddenly in October I had a spike on inbound links from forums and spams sites. Each one had setup hundreds of links. The links goes to WordPress internal search. Example: mysite.com/es/?s=⚄
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Arlinaite470 -
Inbound links with malicious anchor text. Negative seo attack
Hi, What to do with more than 300 links with a malicious anchor text that has nothing to do with my content. I am disavowing those links for the last 5 years. Some of them are directed to URLs that have been changed more than 8 years ago. How can I block this malicious behavior? Thanks in advance
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Arlinaite470 -
Can I post an article on my blog if it has already been published and taken down?
Hi Guys, A writer for my site has offered to let me post her article on my blog, however the article has already been published on another blog, but the blog has now been taken down. If I publish this on my blog will there be any harm to my blog? I want to stay clean and not be in trouble with penguin in any way shape or form! Cheers everyone appreciate some advice here!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | edward-may0 -
Website rankings plummeted after a negative SEO attack - help!
Hello Mozzers A website of a new client (http://bit.ly/PuVNTp) use to rank very well. It was on the top page for any relevant search terms in its industry in Southern Ontario (Canada). Late last year, the client was the victim of a negative SEO attack. Thousands upon thousands of spammy backlinks were built (suspected to be bought using something like Fiverr). The links came from very questionable sites or just low quality sites. The backlink growth window was very small (2,000 every 24 hours or so). Since that happened that site has all but disappeared from search results. It is still indexed and the owner has disavowed most of the bad backlinks but the site can't seem to bounce back. The same happened for another site that they own (http://bit.ly/1tErxpu) except the number backlinks produced was even higher. The sites both suffer from duplicate content issues and at one point (in 2012) were de-indexed due to the very spammy work of a former SEO. They came back in early 2013 and were fine for some time. Thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mattylac0 -
Negative SEO to inner page: remove page or disavow links?
Someone decided to run a negative-SEO campaign, hitting one of the inner pages on my blog 😞 I noticed the links started to pile up yesterday but I assume there will be more to come over the next few days. The targeted page is of little value to my blog, so the question is: should I remove the affected page (hoping that the links won't affect the entire site) or to submit a disavow request? I'm not concerned about what happens to the affected page, but I want to make sure the entire site doesn't get affected as a result of the negative-SEO. Thanks in advance. Howard
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | howardd0 -
Negative SEO attack working amazingly on Google.ca
We have a client www.atvandtrailersales.com who recently (March) fell out of the rankings. We checked their backlink file and found over 100 spam links pointing at their website with terms like "uggboots" and "headwear" etc. etc. I submitted a disavow link file, as this was obviously an attack on the website. Since the recent Panda update, the client is back out of the rankings for a majority of keyword phrases. The disavow link file that was submitted back in march has 90% of the same links that are still spamming the website now. I've sent a spam report to Google and nothing has happened. I could submit a new disavow link file, but I'm not sure if this is worth the time. '.'< --Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SmartWebPros1 -
Is Guest Blogging the Next Link Buying
I like the guest blogging idea for two reasons. One, it builds links, and two, it allows me to add content to a lot of blogs that are really interested in growing a lot of good content. But I often read articles that give credit to another article, that give credit to another article. I have been offered plenty of documents for client blogs, but I am worried that at some point in the future Google will decide all this guest blogging is similar to link trading and selling. What does everyone else think of guest blogging?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | HandsomeWeb1 -
Explain To Me How Negative SEO ISNT Real?
I'm seeing lots of "offers" springing up to do negative SEO on your competitors. I know people keep insisting this sort of thing is just a bogeyman, but follow my logic here: We know the Penguin update PENALIZED, and not just devalued "over optimization." Read: exact match keyword links. We know that if your link profile is too "unnaturally" keyword heavy, (it should be majority your brand or your domain or your company name, etc) you get penalized. Again, not devalued, PENALIZED. Ok. So what is to stop a blackhatter from using one of those software bots to just kill a competitor? Knowing the above two points, lets say a website is ranking for "cool widgets". Why not just create a bunch of exact match keyword spam links for "cool widgets" targeting that website. In a while, the Penguin penalty kicks in and bammo. The thing that scares me about the post Penguin landscape is that google has specifically named an activity ("over optimization") that will get you PENALIZED. So, don't do that, right? Except, that means they've explicitly outlined an activity that will be penalized, and is easy for others to do to you, and that you would be powerless to prevent. I await the usual "this is an age old worry that has never come true" replies. But if you reply that way, ask yourself, can you refute the logic of the points above? And also... oh no... It's happening. I'm seeing it.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | brianmcc1